Cri.Bail Application No.301/2024
..1..

MHCC020020802024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.301 OF 2024
IN
C.R.NO.55 OF 2024
Sudhir Anjani Tiwari
Aged 29 Years, Occupation: Not mentioned,
Residing at Near Datta Mandir,
Ashok Nagar, Tagore Nagar,
Group No.1, Vikhroli (E),
Mumbai 400 083
..Applicant/Orig.Accused
Vs.
1) State of Maharashtra
Senior Police Inspector,
Ghatkopar Police Station
in C.R.No.55/2024.
&
2) XXX
..Respondent/Complainant
Appearances :Ld. Advocate Mr. Manvendra N. Singh, for the Applicant/Accused.
Ld. Addl. P.P. Mrs. Meera Choudhari-Bhosale, for the State/
Respondent.
Ld. Advocate Ms. Simran Shaikh, for the Intervener.
CORAM : HHJ DR.GAURI KAWDIKAR
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
(COURT ROOM NO. 41)
DATED : 21ST MARCH, 2024
ORDER
01.

The application is filed by the accused under Section 439
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with C.R.

..2..

No.55/2024 registered with Ghatkopar Police Station for the offence
punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860.
02.

Notice was issued to the respondent. The Investigating
Officer has filed Say at Exh.2. It is adopted by the Ld. Addl.P.P.
Advocate for victim has filed say at Exh.4. Additional say is filed by
the victim at Exh. 07.
03.

Heard both the Ld. Counsels. It is the contention of the
advocate of the accused that the complainant and the accused knew
each other since college days. The complainant got married in the
year 2017 and in the year 2022 she took a divorce. The accused came
in touch with the complainant and they had a love affair.

He
submitted that filing of the complaint is nothing but arm twisting by
the complainant to force the accused to marry her.

He further
submitted that mobile phone of the accused is seized. The accused
got married on 04/12/2023 and the complainant has lodged FIR as
revenge on 12/01/2024. The accused was arrested on 19/01/2024. He
submitted that the amount of Rs.8,50,000/- allegedly given was for
the business of the complainant and the accused in which the
complainant was a sleeping partner. He submitted that on
04/03/2024 the wife of the accused has filed complaint against the
present complainant at Ghatkopar Police Station. He submitted that
charge-sheet is filed and no purpose would be served by keeping the
accused behind bars. He submitted that there are no criminal
antecedents attributed to the accused. The accused is permanent
..3..

resident of Mumbai. He is ready to abide by all terms and condition
imposed by the Court. He has prayed for grant of bail to accused.
04.

It is the contention of Ld. Addl.P.P that the offence is
serious in nature. Investigation is complete. Charge-sheet is filed
before 49th Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai.
Statement of complainant under section 164 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 is not recorded. Statement of witnesses under
section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are recorded. If
the accused is granted bail, he would pressurize the complainant,
hinder the investigation and tamper with evidence. If the accused is
granted bail, there is possibility that he would abscond and not
remain present for trial. She has submitted that application may be
rejected.
05.

It is the contention of the victim that the charge-sheet is
filed without recording her statement under section 164 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The family members of the accused are
threatening the victim. NC bearing No.0130/2024 is filed on
20/01/2024 for offence punishable under section 506 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 against Anjani Tiwari i.e. father of the accused.
She further submitted that Dell Laptop, gents finger ring and neck
chain are to be recovered from the accused.

The amount of
Rs.10,60,000/- also is not received by the victim which she had given
to the accused. She has prayed for rejection of the application.
06.

Perused record. FIR shows that the complainant was
married in the year 2017 and got divorce in the year 2022. The
accused is college friend of the complainant and he took her number
..4..

from her sister. The complainant has a son from earlier marriage.
After talking with the accused for few days, the accused proposed to
her.

Initially the complainant rejected the proposal as she was
already a divorcee and having a son and the family members of the
accused would not have accepted her. The accused told her that he
would convince his parents and they continued to talk and meet.
07.

On 04/10/2022, the accused called her and told her that
he wanted to talk about the relationship is to be disclosed to his
family members and called her at a hotel. The complainant refused
but the accused told her that their relationship is not known in his
house and if any person comes to know about it, it will create
problem. Then the complainant agreed to meet him. On 05/10/2022,
the accused took the complainant from 01:00 a.m. to 07:00 a.m. at
Hotel Blue Pearl Residency, Near Asalfa Metro Station. The accused
talked with her about marriage and gave assurance to look after the
complainant and her son and said that with the permission of their
family members, they would marry soon and established sexual
relations with her. The accused took photos of the complainant in
his mobile. When the complainant told him to delete said photos, he
asked that does she not believe him and that he is not a cheap
person. Afterwards, by giving threat to viral her photographs and to
show the photographs to her father, the accused forcibly established
sexual relations with her at her house when no one was present. The
complainant gave the amount of Rs,.8,50,000/- to the accused for
various reasons on being given promise of marriage. The
complainant also gave Dell Laptop to the accused for using. In
November 2023, the accused went to his village to talk about their
..5..

marriage. Later the complainant came to know that in the year 2017,
the accused got married with one Sayba Siddiqui. FIR was lodged
on 12/01/2024.
08.
old.

When the FIR was lodged, the complainant was 27 years
Thus, in the year 2022, at the time of first incident, the
complainant was 25 years old. As a 25 years old, she is having
sufficient maturity to understand the consequences of one’ act. From
2022 till November 2023, the complainant and the accused had
sexual relations many times at her home. The fact that they had
sexual relations at the house of the complainant herself prima-facie
shows her consent. Similarly, the fact that the complainant herself
gave the huge amount of Rs.8,50,000/- to the accused from time to
time due to various reasons and also gave her Dell Laptop for his use
prima-facie shows they had love affair. Whether the consent of
sexual relations was given due to promise of marriage is a question
of evidence. Further, whether to promise to marry was false from
inception is also a question of evidence. At this stage, based on the
amount of Rs.8,50,000/- given by the complainant to the accused,
sexual relationship at the house of the complainant herself, no
complaint from 04/10/2022 till the present FIR lodged on 12/01/2024
i.e. for a period of 1 year 3 months, no NC or any other complaint in
respect of the obscene photos taken by the accused of the
complainant which the complainant had knowledge about on
05/10/2022 itself; prima-facie show that their sexual relationship was
consensual.

It is pertinent to note that FIR is lodged after the
complainant came to know about the marriage of the accused. The
accused has got married on 04/12/2023.

The investigation is
..6..

complete. Mobile phone containing the obscene photos of the
complainant is seized. Though the police had issued notice to the
complainant for remaining present for recording her statement under
section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, she herself did
not remain present. Even at this stage, her statement under section
164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be recorded.
09.

Advocate for the accused has relied on Akshay Manoj
Jaisinghani Vs. State of Maharashtra in Anticipatory Bail
Application No.2221/2016 dated 09/01/2017, wherein it was held that
only because two individuals are sexually involved with each other, it
is not compulsory for them to marry. In the present case, prima-
facie the sexual relationship between the complainant and the
accused appears consensual. As the facts of the two cases are similar,
the above ratio is applied.
10.

Advocate for the accused has further relied on
Dnyaneshwar Trimbak Navghare Vs. State of Maharashtra in
Criminal Bail Application No.234/2020 dated 13/07/2020, wherein it
was held that the victim was a minor. In the present case, the
complainant is a major. As the facts of the two cases are different,
the above ratio is not applicable.
11.

At this stage, investigation is complete and charge-sheet
is filed. But it is the contention of the complainant that the accused
has one more mobile of one-plus which is not yet recovered and
containing her obscene photos. It is the contention of the
complainant that Dell Laptop, gold chain and gold ring are not
seized from the accused but in the say of the Investigating Officer at
..7..

Exh.02 which is clearly mentioned that two mobile phone, one Dell
Laptop, one gold chain and one gold ring are seized from the
accused. Similarly, obscene video of the complainant is also seized
from the mobile phone of the accused. Thus, no further recovery is
to be done from the accused. Taking into consideration prima-facie
consensual sexual relationship between the parties, filing of chargesheet; there is no priority in keeping the accused behind bars. The
complainant has lodged NC on 20/01/2024 that the family members
of the accused are threatening her. To protect the complainant, the
accused can be directed to attend police station by imposing certain
terms and conditions on him. Further, there are no criminal
antecedents attributed to the accused. The accused is permanent
resident of Mumbai. To avoid future dispute and repetition of
offence, to ensure the presence of the accused for trial, certain terms
and condition can be imposed on the accused. For the aforesaid
reasoning, it is found fit to grant bail to the accused by imposing
certain terms and conditions. Hence the orderORDER
1.

The Criminal Bail Application is allowed.

2.

The accused Sudhir Anjani Tiwari be released on bail in Crime
No.55 of 2024 registered with Ghatkopar Police Station for the
offence punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 on executing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/with one or more surety/sureties in like amount, on the
following conditions :a) He shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses and
evidence.

..8..

b) He shall attend Ghatkopar Police Station on the 1st
Sunday of every 3 months from 10:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.
till conclusion of the trial.

c) He shall not commit any offence in future.
d) He shall not contact the complainant, witnesses and their
family members directly or indirectly by any means till
conclusion of the trial.

e) He shall not upload any video or photographs of the
complainant on Social Media.

f) He shall not leave India without permission of the Court.
g) He shall furnish his permanent and temporary address, if
any, and his contact details to the concerned police
station.

h) He shall not change his residential address without prior
intimation to the Investigation Officer and to the
concerned Court.

3.

Breach of any condition would entail cancellation of bail.

Date: 21/03/2024
Place: Mumbai
(Dr. Gauri Kawdikar)
Addl.Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Mumbai
..9..

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time
21/03/2024
01:52 P.M.

Name of the Judge
(With Court Room No.)

Name of Stenographer
Mrs. Mrunal S. Pendkhalkar
HHJ DR.GAURI KAWDIKAR
(Court Room No. 41)
Date of Pronouncement of
ORDER
21/03/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
21/03/2024
ORDER uploaded on
21/03/2024